- Yeah, but it just meant you could get your Gruesome-Murder on right from the start ^^soladrin said:
fallout 3. what you know?
- Thread starter rhizic
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I personally preferred my gore to progress through the game. It's satisfying when you start off killing rats in a manner about as gory as snuffing out candle flames, then progressing onto peppering bandits with holes, then blowing hefty chunks out of super mutants, up until you're vaporising deathclaws with a well-aimed shot to the vitals. The later gore is more satisfying when you know from what humble roots you started...
Where can we get the demo (or demo-ling since it not too good)?
What traits do you usually chose? I go for finesse and gifted, mostly because I enjoy the statisfying rifle round to the head, with the graceful slumping to the floor then the joy of breaking their legs with the super sledge, with a finisher to the eyes.
And gifted for the fact I can train up skills with each level and books, (In Fallout 1 it is piss easy with Mrs Staploton, the bookkeeper with infinite books), but not my stats.
I just thought with the skill in unarmed will we be able to see the different types of strikes?
What traits do you usually chose? I go for finesse and gifted, mostly because I enjoy the statisfying rifle round to the head, with the graceful slumping to the floor then the joy of breaking their legs with the super sledge, with a finisher to the eyes.
And gifted for the fact I can train up skills with each level and books, (In Fallout 1 it is piss easy with Mrs Staploton, the bookkeeper with infinite books), but not my stats.
I just thought with the skill in unarmed will we be able to see the different types of strikes?
I don't know why no-one else has noticed this, but there is child killing in Oblivion - The Adoring Fan.soladrin said:
The Van Buuren demo was an engine demo, it was in early alpha when Interplay stopped working on Fallout. It was just to see that the graphics were working and that the coding was right. The turn based wasn't implemented yet (it was on the to-do list). Don't go judging it as though it was a complete game/engine.
If my memory serves correctly, you should be able to get a link to download Van Buren from No Mutants Allowed. It is a TECH demo meaning it was not represetative of a at least 65% done game. It was merely a demostration of the game engine.
On the subject of Fallout 3, I'm not holding my breath. I liked Morrowind and Oblivion had a couple good moments (namely the Dark Brotherhood quests) but honestly Oblivion was like kinda of a step down from some of the things I carried over from Morrowind. Namely, it held your hand all the damn time and spoon fed you information. The quest information was so specific in detail that all it didn't do was complete the quest for you. Hopefully they won't do this in Fallout 3. I'd really hate to have the game pretty much babysit me the entire time.
The Father Disappearing thing? Meh, it works for some games. I think it's a little cliche, but I can let it slide if the execution of the plot is done well enough.
Combat? No, I'm sorry if I want another Post-Apoc FPS I'll play Stalker and it's sequel upon release. The thing with FPS style combat is that twitch gameplay will always be present. You just can't counter it no matter how hard BethSoft claims V.A.T.S. will discourage it. In the end it'll always rely on your personal (not your characters) "SUPAH LEET HALOLZ SKILLZ" to actually hit the target. I'm sorry if this makes your uncomfortable, but I believe in the character's aptitude (or lack thereof) being reliant on the character's own skills and abilities that you chose at creation, not your own personal skills being penalized or enhanced by the character's.
While, yes, I said I enjoyed Morrowind (which is FP hack'n'slash) it isn't Fallout. Fallout was an Isometric, turn-based, action/adventure RPG that was designed to simulate the fun of playing a Pen n' Paper RPG. The character development was done by your character performing well not you performing well. While your personal decisions and strategy (or the lack thereof) affected your characters fate. His ability to effectively use items like weapons relied on his own abilites. A Character with 200% in Small Guns and 50% in Big Guns is going perform far better with an Assault Rifle or Gauss Pistol than with a Bozar or Minigun. However, he still does not rely on your own personal ability to line up the crosshairs on the target.
In the end, I will wait and see...
P.S. If you do not like me, this post, and/or feel compelled to criticize, complain, discuss, or flame me. By all means go ahead, you are entitled to your opinion as much as I am to mine. Just expect me to return the favor for better or for worse.
On the subject of Fallout 3, I'm not holding my breath. I liked Morrowind and Oblivion had a couple good moments (namely the Dark Brotherhood quests) but honestly Oblivion was like kinda of a step down from some of the things I carried over from Morrowind. Namely, it held your hand all the damn time and spoon fed you information. The quest information was so specific in detail that all it didn't do was complete the quest for you. Hopefully they won't do this in Fallout 3. I'd really hate to have the game pretty much babysit me the entire time.
The Father Disappearing thing? Meh, it works for some games. I think it's a little cliche, but I can let it slide if the execution of the plot is done well enough.
Combat? No, I'm sorry if I want another Post-Apoc FPS I'll play Stalker and it's sequel upon release. The thing with FPS style combat is that twitch gameplay will always be present. You just can't counter it no matter how hard BethSoft claims V.A.T.S. will discourage it. In the end it'll always rely on your personal (not your characters) "SUPAH LEET HALOLZ SKILLZ" to actually hit the target. I'm sorry if this makes your uncomfortable, but I believe in the character's aptitude (or lack thereof) being reliant on the character's own skills and abilities that you chose at creation, not your own personal skills being penalized or enhanced by the character's.
While, yes, I said I enjoyed Morrowind (which is FP hack'n'slash) it isn't Fallout. Fallout was an Isometric, turn-based, action/adventure RPG that was designed to simulate the fun of playing a Pen n' Paper RPG. The character development was done by your character performing well not you performing well. While your personal decisions and strategy (or the lack thereof) affected your characters fate. His ability to effectively use items like weapons relied on his own abilites. A Character with 200% in Small Guns and 50% in Big Guns is going perform far better with an Assault Rifle or Gauss Pistol than with a Bozar or Minigun. However, he still does not rely on your own personal ability to line up the crosshairs on the target.
In the end, I will wait and see...
P.S. If you do not like me, this post, and/or feel compelled to criticize, complain, discuss, or flame me. By all means go ahead, you are entitled to your opinion as much as I am to mine. Just expect me to return the favor for better or for worse.
is it for PC only or is it for ps3 and 360 as well... i dont have the money to uopgrade my pc lol
Ok... deep breaths, Jim... don't start ranting... don't start... ranting...
Ok, there... calm...
I think my main issue is with dialogue and choices. I don't think Bethesda knows how to make an RPG with dialogue of the same importance and effect as in Fallout, whether they're trying to or not. I don't think they know how to make a game where you can make the sort of choices Fallout presented. They're in unfamiliar terriory... and they're refusing to get a map (doing things their way)... and they sometimes get lost in their own neighborhood (TES lore is ignored at times). I'm skeptical about them having the ability to make a good Fallout 3, let alone the will to do so.
As for VATS and such, I don't mind, so long as it's fun. I'm no purist. I don't need TB. The troubling thing about it is the gut feeling it creates, that this game will be too 'shoot 'em up' in nature. It's too early to say if that feeling is just needless worry. My expectations at this point are very low. I will be pleasantly surprised if the game is more than "Oblivion with guns and more words". I will be delighted if it actually feels like Fallout, with different choices that lead to different consequences, interesting and unique NPCs, and the like.
Ok, there... calm...
I think my main issue is with dialogue and choices. I don't think Bethesda knows how to make an RPG with dialogue of the same importance and effect as in Fallout, whether they're trying to or not. I don't think they know how to make a game where you can make the sort of choices Fallout presented. They're in unfamiliar terriory... and they're refusing to get a map (doing things their way)... and they sometimes get lost in their own neighborhood (TES lore is ignored at times). I'm skeptical about them having the ability to make a good Fallout 3, let alone the will to do so.
As for VATS and such, I don't mind, so long as it's fun. I'm no purist. I don't need TB. The troubling thing about it is the gut feeling it creates, that this game will be too 'shoot 'em up' in nature. It's too early to say if that feeling is just needless worry. My expectations at this point are very low. I will be pleasantly surprised if the game is more than "Oblivion with guns and more words". I will be delighted if it actually feels like Fallout, with different choices that lead to different consequences, interesting and unique NPCs, and the like.